Sentences with phrase «biblical words do»

Hence, to answer the question of what the Bible says, there is no great advantage in deciding just which biblical words do, and which do not, refer specifically to homosexuality.

Not exact matches

Almost all the stories surrounding Jesus (if he did exist, some scholars say their is no proof of a historical Jesus) were borrowed from earlier myths and used word for word... as well as the rampant literary corruption and forgeries of Biblical Texts... It is also impossible for God to exist in the Christian version or form they created.

Though the words «porn» and «masturbation» don't appear in the Bible, Gyorke believes the biblical verdict is clear.

Two comments.One, the atheist / materialist claims that he / she... «Did «nt believe in free will»... O.K.Should we take that to mean some mindless, heretofore unknown force apllied those words in your behalf?Did someone put the proverbial «gun to your head «and force you to post your comments?we await you presumably forced answer with bated breath.Two.As for Mr.Gingrich, beware.Politics aside, the one question yet remains for Calista: How did you, a professed «devout «Roman Catholic, carry on a 6 - year affair with a man you knew was married?How does that square with the Biblical prohibition against committing adultery?Oh wait!I know!As a «devout «Roman Catholic you can sin with impunity; just go to your priest, say a couple of «hail Marys and Our Fathers», ask the priest to bless your sinning, and resume.Of course!I had forgetton how easily Catholics excuse their trangressions (ex opere operato, anyonDid «nt believe in free will»... O.K.Should we take that to mean some mindless, heretofore unknown force apllied those words in your behalf?Did someone put the proverbial «gun to your head «and force you to post your comments?we await you presumably forced answer with bated breath.Two.As for Mr.Gingrich, beware.Politics aside, the one question yet remains for Calista: How did you, a professed «devout «Roman Catholic, carry on a 6 - year affair with a man you knew was married?How does that square with the Biblical prohibition against committing adultery?Oh wait!I know!As a «devout «Roman Catholic you can sin with impunity; just go to your priest, say a couple of «hail Marys and Our Fathers», ask the priest to bless your sinning, and resume.Of course!I had forgetton how easily Catholics excuse their trangressions (ex opere operato, anyonDid someone put the proverbial «gun to your head «and force you to post your comments?we await you presumably forced answer with bated breath.Two.As for Mr.Gingrich, beware.Politics aside, the one question yet remains for Calista: How did you, a professed «devout «Roman Catholic, carry on a 6 - year affair with a man you knew was married?How does that square with the Biblical prohibition against committing adultery?Oh wait!I know!As a «devout «Roman Catholic you can sin with impunity; just go to your priest, say a couple of «hail Marys and Our Fathers», ask the priest to bless your sinning, and resume.Of course!I had forgetton how easily Catholics excuse their trangressions (ex opere operato, anyondid you, a professed «devout «Roman Catholic, carry on a 6 - year affair with a man you knew was married?How does that square with the Biblical prohibition against committing adultery?Oh wait!I know!As a «devout «Roman Catholic you can sin with impunity; just go to your priest, say a couple of «hail Marys and Our Fathers», ask the priest to bless your sinning, and resume.Of course!I had forgetton how easily Catholics excuse their trangressions (ex opere operato, anyone).

Ahh... did I mention «Biblical Law» or is your mind placing words on the screen that are not really there

The biblical word says the government shall rest on his shoulders, which means that the love, respect and kindness the bible breathes i life should always serve as inspiration for our laws, Which indeed it does in every major democracy.

What Biblical basis do you have to refute the plainly worded verses contained in Scripture that homosexuality is a sin?

Doing a New Testament word study on the Greek word «praus» in order to better understand what Peter means when he instructs women to have a «gentle and quiet spirit» in 1 Peter 3:3 - 4 is biblical exegesis.

On the Council on Biblical Manhood and Womanhood Web Site, Wayne Grudem warns that if Christians accept egalitarianism, «we will begin to have whole churches who no longer «tremble» at the Word of God (Isaiah 66:2), and who no longer live by «every word that comes from the mouth of God» (Matthew 4:4), but who pick and choose the things they like and the things they don't like in the Bible.&raWord of God (Isaiah 66:2), and who no longer live by «every word that comes from the mouth of God» (Matthew 4:4), but who pick and choose the things they like and the things they don't like in the Bible.&raword that comes from the mouth of God» (Matthew 4:4), but who pick and choose the things they like and the things they don't like in the Bible.»

Well then, perhaps you could give your definitions for the theological / biblical terms you cited above plus any other necessary terms that you didn't cite (i.e., your definition in distinction to the Calvinist / Arminian definitions of those words)?

But the Biblical literalist can not do this, and has to insist that the words of Joshua and Elijah, Ecclesiastes and Job, are as true as anything Jesus said, and therefore presumably just as important.

I don't go around doing word searches in places where I disagree with the Bible while refraining from doing word searches where biblical teachings are convenient to me.

My first point registers the conviction that the primary hermeneutical principle arises from the decision how to approach the biblical text, whether to view it as I do as God's written Word or to see it in a reduced mode such as is common today.

But if we don't want to call it sin, then we will begin dismantling the biblical word (should God really have said?)

It is as if the Queen has genuinely internalised the biblical truth that «whatever [we] do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus» (Colossians 3:17).

The only thing that bugs me about this guy is that there are more people than not who are teetering on the brink of faith in Jesus, and all this guy does is try to knock people away from faith... This is his word against Gods word, I've been reading these articles they've been posting, and nothing he's said has any biblical foundation whatsoever...

In this respect, contemporary «materialism» (if that is the right word here) is much more in accordance with the biblical presentation, in which God does not deny or negate the creation but affirms it, identifies himself with it, and acts within it.

The reason I say that is that he can not have ANY conversation where he does not stop lecturing of the virtues of catholicism or boring me to death with the meaning of «biblical words».

A positive Biblical scholarship can do much toward learning the context, literary genre, and purpose of each portion of God's Word.

In Chapter 2, Smith delves more deeply into the extent and source of pervasive interpretive pluralism, and in doing so, he tackles what has been a pet peeve of mine for many years — the misuse of the word «biblical.»

How do we allow the Bible to inform and guide us while remaining cognizant of our tendency to be selective and without abusing the word «biblical»?

Now that the author has seemingly done damage to the integrity of the biblical text to the point that we can apparently know nothing more, or do nothing more, than feel our way around in the dark never being certain of what God's Holy Word says I ask this question:

The fall of Adam and Eve, the covenants with Israel and its deliverance from bondage, its falling away and punishment through new sufferings, the speaking of the divine word through the prophets, the birth of Christ in human flesh, the life and death of Jesus, the experience of the resurrection, and the history of the Church, the expectation of the final events and the established reign of God in love and peace — all this is the Biblical understanding of what God has done, is doing, and will continue to do for the judgment and redemption of the world.

When I first mentioned that I'd been asked by my publisher to take the word «vagina» out of my manuscript for A Year of Biblical Womanhood in deference to the general preferences of Christian bookstores, I never expected you guys to care, much less do something about it.

My experiences of God's love were very clear to me, and I simply assumed, as did most biblical writers, that God's love had been made abundantly clear in the miracles of the Exodus, the words of the prophets, the work of Christ.

When Evangelicals claim adultery as biblical grounds for divorce, they not only put words into Jesus's mouth that the Gospels do not record him as actually saying, but they mutilate the essence of the uniqueness of the Christian witness to marriage.

When Paul says that «all Scripture is inspired by God» (2 Tim 3:16), he doesn't mean that the biblical writers received God's word while rolling around in some trance, totally unaware of what was going on.

This is such a truism that one is almost ashamed to pen the words, and yet it remains a fact that, in a great deal of the more conservative biblical scholarship, it does seem to be assumed that the appeal to factual accuracy would he as valid and important a factor in the case of ancient Near Eastern religious texts as it would be in a modern western court of law or in a somewhat literally - minded western congregation.

Which I did, and you replied with, «If you're questioning the word «supposed», I'm simply expressing that Biblical record is not accepted as inherently accurate.

little topher, you didn't provide the EXACT BIBLICAL scripture that defines traditional marriage using those very words, so your opinion is a bit useless.

don't put words in my mouth... as for your description... its not Biblical and based o0ut of ignorance..

Or, if you don't want to get tapes, just tune your radio to a station with lots of biblical preaching on it, especially if the most of the sermons are verse by verse teaching of the Word of God.

«That said, if the churches do not take the opportunity now to «advocate» and «teach» why same - sex marriage is wrong for everyone (i.e., harmful to children, to the couple, and undermining of a culture of marriage), religious people should not expect to find a lot of sympathy for their right to exercise their religious freedom to dissent from same - sex marriage,» Esbeck told CT. «In other words, church leaders no longer enjoy the luxury of not teaching biblical marriage, as much as large numbers of the laity don't want to hear it.

It is the type of Christian who would rather talk about doctrine, theology, and the meanings of various biblical words and passages without ever actually doing anything.

You don't have to be in front of everyone saying poetic words of biblical wisdom to each request.

When a Lutheran and a Catholic each talk of faith, does each define the word by some comprehensive abstract system, or by the complex associations the word has in a great range of shared biblical texts, such as Romans 1 with its talk of faith as that by which we live, I Corinthians 13 with its association of faith with hope and love, and Hebrews 11 with its definition of faith as assurance and conviction?

You speak about a kind of listening to the Word that does not require advanced biblical criticism.

It's just that the word doesn't mean what it means in the biblical tradition.

What do we do about using the word «biblical»?

In other words, though the Doctrine of Inspiration is logical, it does not seem to be biblical.

The Navarre Bible, that wonderful commentary which has done so much to seed the wasteland of contemporary Biblical scholarship, refers in connection with the passage I quoted from Matthew (9:36) to words of St Margaret Mary Alacoque: «This Divine Heart is a great abyss which holds all good, and he commands that all his poor people should pour their needs into it.

And at this climax, Lamentations embraces words that have continued to bring incalculable solace to persons in all branches of biblical faith in all time: Yahweh will not cast off for ever, but, though he cause grief, he will have compassion according to the abundance of his steadfast love (hesed); for he does not willingly afflict or grieve the sons of men.

Do you know the prebilical and biblical meaning of the word «god»?

The biblical text does not use the omni words — obviously.

It is true that there is no word for though in the original, but that is because biblical Hebrew doesn't use such words.

In the words of one older Catholic biblical scholar to this writer, «But did Paul have any ethics?»

I had parts of Gods biblical word supernaturally revealed to me in dreams before I read it, I was dreaming about things i didn't know about that were from the bible.

I have in my life time attended many churches and I do know tyhe biblical meaning of the word, but in the «christian» world there are so many factions and every one of them believing that they hold a corner on the truth!

All Year: The Bible (There are many translations available at biblegateway.com)- Anchor Bible Commentary Series - The Women's Bible Commentary, Edited by Carol A. Newsom and Sharon H. Ringe - Living Judaism: The Guide to Jewish Belief, Tradition, and Practice by Wayne D. Dosick - Women in Scripture: A Dictionary of Named and Unnamed Women in the Hebrew Bible, the Apocryphal / Deuterocanonical books, and the New Testament, Edited by Carol Meyers, Toni Cravien, and Ross Shepard Kraemer - Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood, Edited by John Piper and Wayne Grudem - Discovering Biblical Equality: Complementarity Without Hierarchy, Edited by Ronald W. Pierce, Rebecca Merrill Groothuis and Gordon D. Fee - Women in the World of the Earliest Christians: Illuminating Ancient Ways of Life by Lynn Cohick - God's Word to Women by Katharine C. Bushnell - Don't Know Much About the Bible: Everything You Need to Know About the Good Book but Never Learned by Kenneth C. Davis - «On The Dignity and Vocation of Women» by Pope John Paul II - The Year of Living Biblically by A.J. Jacobs

And this man, who had gone around the world once, and was going to marry Emma Wedgwood, did not believe a single word of the biblical story of creation.